---
title: Free Software Position Paper
...

Free software is beautiful.
[Although](https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html)
[definitions](https://opensource.org/osd)
[vary](https://www.debian.org/social_contract), free software essentially is
software that respects the user to use, inspect, modify, and redistribute the
program. Free software is pervasive, through projects like
[GNU](https://gnu.org), [Linux](https://kernel.org), and
[Firefox](https://firefox.com). However, its key proponent, there are two
critical flaws in the philosophy of the [Free Software
Foundation](https://fsf.org) and its leader [Richard
Stallman](https://stallman.org/).

In particularly, I disagree with two key views of the FSF:

- Proprietary software in and of itself is evil in all forms
- Software is special

The issue with #1 is pragmatic: it vilifies the wrong people. In particular, it
is not necessarily immoral to develop proprietary software. The issues are about
perpetuating the system of injustice, a crime of the people in business,
marketing, and so on. Indeed, I pity many proprietary developers, since often
their bosses are the ones at fault; they are slaves to the system.
Unfortunately, the FSF not only disagrees with this view, but they also create
an toxic us-versus-them mentality which makes the cause of free software
unpalatable to many.

Point #2 is a bigger issue: software is not special. It is true that there are
freedom issues layered on top of software, like privacy and free speech,
although these are tangential [^tor]. Proprietary software is not wrong because
it denies the "freedom to modify your devices". It is about so much more:
freedom to be in control of your life, a belief in equality, a love for
copyleft, a need for free knowledge, and so on. *Those* are what matter, and
they apply just as well to free music, art, and prose.

It is doublethink to advocate openly for free software games with proprietary
assets. Perhaps proprietary games with free assets are preferable: while code
and art are on equal footing, code may be easier to replace in a game than art.
The FSF, as well as Stallman himself, generally makes this arbitrary
distinction, causing problems for free culture and free hardware. The fact
remains that free software does not exist in a nutshell. [Digital Restrictions
Management] is not defeated by lobbying Hollywood; it is defeated by licensing
our own works under the [CC BY-SA], so that the "protections" are irrelevant.
Similarly, proprietary drivers are not freed by begging the manufacturer; the
problem is solved by instead supporting free hardware, controllable by default.
It is all connected, and I see that. I realise it is not possible to be free in
all areas, but rather than ignore everything but software, I make small
compromises across all of the areas, to maximise freedom over all. It is not
zero sum. 

The bottom line is simple: thirty years ago, Stallman acquired a love for free
software -- and a hate for proprietary software -- for a specific reason,
relevant to him at the time.  He has since dedicated himself to free software;
now that his original reasons for free software are not relevant, the new
justification has become "free software is good and proprietary is bad". It is
off-putting to outsiders -- without 30 years of context, it is an absurd
conclusion. However, this is an issue, as free software *is* justifiable to the
masses in today's environment. Unfortunately, Stallman continues to use his
reasoning from the 80s, which nobody except the people from the 80s (and those
who wish they were!) really *get*. His motto is "Join us hackers, come share in
the software". Mine is "Join us people, come share in the culture"

[^tor]: Revolutionary projects, like [Tor](https://tor.org), could not exist
as proprietary software. It is essential that operating systems and
[bootloaders](https://libreboot.org) are free to maintain these digital
liberties; however, this does not provide an imperative for freeing programs
like games.

[Digital Restrictions Management]:
https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management

[CC BY-SA]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
